AMANDA BEVERLY, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court affirmed the conviction because the supplemental record failed to establish that the appellant's nolo contendere plea was conditioned on a reservation of appellate review rights as required by State v. Ashby.
A nolo contendere plea does not preserve appellate review of legal questions unless the record clearly shows the plea was conditioned upon a reservation of that right at the time of entry.
[1] A nolo contendere plea does not preserve appellate review of legal questions unless the record affirmatively shows the plea was conditioned upon a reservation of appellat…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAmanda Beverly entered a nolo contendere plea and sought appellate review of a legal question. The trial court allowed supplemental filing of an affid…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Right To Appellate Review cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
By per curiam order filed hereon on November 24, 1975, (Beverly v. State, Fla.App. 1st 1975, 322 So. 2d 597) we allowed appellant until November 29, 1975, within which to file a supplemental record reflecting that his plea of nolo contendere was conditioned upon a reservation or right to appellate review of a question of law as permitted by State v. Ashby, Sup.Ct.Fla. 1971, 245 So. 2d 225. Appellant thereafter filed a motion to which was attached an affidavit of his trial counsel, who does not appear to have been a public defender nor otherwise an employee of the state, requesting that such affidavit be made and considered as a part of the record on appeal. That motion was granted by our order of January 16, 1976.
The record, as supplemented by said affidavit, fails to reveal that appellant’s plea of nolo contendere was conditioned upon any reservation of right nor does the record reveal that appellate review has been frustrated by any state action. (Hollingshead v. Wainwright, Sup.Ct.Fla.1967, 194 So. 2d 577)
Accordingly, in accordance with the concluding paragraph of our per curiam order filed November 24, 1975, above mentioned, the judgment and sentence here appealed are
AFFIRMED."
BOYER, C. J., and RAWLS and Mc-CORD, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- State v. Ashby, 245 So. 2d 225 (Fla. 1971)
- Cleveland Hollingshead v. Louie L. Wainwright, 194 So. 2d 577 (Fla. 1967)
- Beverly v. State, 322 So. 2d 597 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975)